Ann Arbor Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Gastroenterology. 2020 Jun;158(8):2082-2092. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2020.02.037. Epub 2020 Feb 29.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Guidelines suggest endoscopic screening of individuals who are at increased risk for Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma. Tools based on clinical factors are available for identifying patients at risk, but only some have been validated. We aimed to compare and validate available tools.
We performed a prospective study of 1241 patients, ages 40 to 79 years, presenting either for their first esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) or their first endoscopic therapy of early neoplastic BE, from April 2015 through June 2018. We calculated risk scores for 6 previously published tools (the Gerson, Locke, Thrift, Michigan BE pREdiction Tool [M-BERET], Nord-Trøndelag Health Study [HUNT], and Kunzmann tools). We also investigated the accuracy of frequency and duration of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), using data from a randomly selected 50% of patients undergoing their first EGD. We compared the ability of all these tools to discriminate patients with BE and early neoplasia from patients without BE, using findings from endoscopy as the reference standard.
BE was detected in 81 of 1152 patients during their first EGD (7.0%). GERD symptoms alone identified patients with BE with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AuROC) of 0.579. All of the tools were more accurate in identifying patients with BE than the frequency and duration of GERD (AuROC for GERD, 0.579 vs range for other tools, 0.660-0.695), and predicted risk correlated well with observed risk (calibration). The AUROCs of the HUNT tool (0.796), the M-BERET (0.773), and the Kunzmann tool (0.763) were comparable in discriminating between patients with early neoplasia (n = 94) vs no BE. Each tool was more accurate in discriminating BE with early neoplasia than GERD frequency and duration alone (AuROC, 0.667; P < .01).
The HUNT, M-BERET, and Kunzmann tools identify patients with BE with AuROC values ranging from 0.665 to 0.695, and discriminate patients with early neoplasia from patients without BE with AuROC values ranging from 0.763 to 0.796. These tools are more accurate than frequency and duration of GERD in identifying individuals at risk for neoplastic BE.
指南建议对患有巴雷特食管(BE)和食管腺癌风险增加的个体进行内镜筛查。目前已有基于临床因素的工具用于识别风险患者,但其中只有部分已得到验证。本研究旨在比较和验证现有工具。
我们对 2015 年 4 月至 2018 年 6 月期间,年龄在 40 至 79 岁之间的 1241 名首次接受食管胃十二指肠镜检查(EGD)或早期肿瘤性 BE 内镜治疗的患者进行了前瞻性研究。我们计算了 6 种已发表工具(Gerson、Locke、Thrift、密歇根 BE 预测工具[M-BERET]、北特伦德拉格健康研究[HUNT]和 Kunzmann 工具)的风险评分。我们还研究了使用首次接受 EGD 的 50%患者的数据来评估胃食管反流病(GERD)频率和持续时间的准确性。我们将所有这些工具识别出具有 BE 和早期肿瘤的患者与不具有 BE 的患者的能力进行了比较,将内镜检查结果作为参考标准。
在首次 EGD 中,1152 名患者中有 81 名(7.0%)发现了 BE。仅 GERD 症状即可识别出具有 BE 的患者,其接受者操作特征曲线(AUROC)为 0.579。所有工具在识别 BE 患者方面都比 GERD 频率和持续时间更准确(GERD 的 AUROC 为 0.579,其他工具的范围为 0.660-0.695),且预测风险与观察到的风险相关性良好(校准)。HUNT 工具(0.796)、M-BERET(0.773)和 Kunzmann 工具(0.763)在区分早期肿瘤患者(n=94)与无 BE 患者方面的 AUROC 相当。每个工具在区分具有早期肿瘤的 BE 与单独的 GERD 频率和持续时间方面都更准确(AUROC,0.667;P<0.01)。
HUNT、M-BERET 和 Kunzmann 工具识别出具有 AUROC 值范围为 0.665 至 0.695 的 BE 患者,并识别出具有 AUROC 值范围为 0.763 至 0.796 的早期肿瘤患者与无 BE 患者。这些工具在识别患有肿瘤性 BE 的高危个体方面比 GERD 频率和持续时间更准确。